Have I misread the judgement on edge vs souledge? It found no case to answer for Namco, so why did they switch to Soulcalibur?

Because legal proceedings like that are long-winded and don't really help anyone. That case was actually about the original Soul Edge game, which they renamed to Soul Blade at the start of 1997. They renamed it simply to avoid any grief that Langdell might have thrown their way, and it didn't go to courts until 2002. If they'd actually wanted to release it under the name Soul Edge, they would have legally had to wait until then to do so, and that's assuming the courts didn't rule in favour of Edge Games.

Armitage Shanks:I disagree with this article on a fundamental level. Why is The Escapist even trying to attempt objectivity? Don't they know the best journalists base stories on assumption and public opinion?

Yes, well done. The point people are making is that it's pretty hard to look at the hard evidence (Which is constantly being linked to) and draw the kind of conclusions that The Escapist have. It's not assumption, it seems pretty black-and-white to me.

I think this article proves they aren't. What a load of absolute fucking horseshit.

Here's what they could have written: "We got it wrong - here's what we now know". Instead, this article hides behind "Ooh, lookie - new evidence!", using content DOZENS of other articles have already published (in many cases months ago), including the huge resource at TIGSource.

What's most depressing is the number of people here taking Escapist's crap at face value, rather than looking elsewhere online and finding genuine investigative journalism and commentary on the subject from the likes of TIGSource, Eurogamer, et al.

Also, gotta love your copyright attorney, Escapist. I'd say anyone telling a company to settle when the disputed mark is in part based on rights infringement and almost certainly partially falsified court documents is an idiot, not a professional.

But if that's so, then why is Mobigame fighting? The answer to that is that they believe they've been treated unfairly.

No, the answer is because they have a legal basis to dispute the mark that is just as strong and Langdell's case for the mark, but, despite all the evidence to show this, you guys are clearly too dumb to realise it or have egos too big to admit you fucked up in the first place. Either way, this would be piss-poor form from a petulant and arrogant teenage blogger. From a supposedly professional publication, it's absolutely shameful. Congratulations, Escapist - you want to be Edge, but you're actually The News of the World.

Jeez, stop moaning! No one cares, and, clearly, most of us liked the article.

mk-1601:"...but in the absence of any further evidence contradicting our initial conclusions..."

You are joking, right?

"But if that's so, then why is Mobigame fighting? The answer to that is that they believe they've been treated unfairly. Whether or not that's a sufficient legal basis for their arguments, it's at least understandable."

This whole paragraph is condescending and disingenuous beyond belief.

Please, just admit that you were wrong initially and are falling ever further behind in your attempts to equivocate on this matter. Your attempts at damage limitation are as embarrassingly out of step with the community as your non-Zero Punctuation video programming.

Bah. n00b fail.

When he says "Why is Mobigame fighting" he means, "Oh My God there is a giant shark in front of me and it is backed by a billion lawyers! BUT NO! I SHALL REMAIN!"

When he says, "The answer to that is that they believe they've been treated unfairly. Whether or not that's a sufficient legal basis for their arguments, it's at least understandable." he means, "Well, I make sense, I most certainly have the moral high ground, but do I have the means to fight against a giant sharks lawyers/sucker fish?"

...he isn't giving his opinion, just saying that he thinks that they might not have the legal power here.

And they have changed their opinion since the first article, they apologised for the angriness of the first article in the second article.

...There is no point arguing against your last paragraph, it's just stupid.

RobF:How, given the evidence produced and the evidence displayed in the article you can feel comfortable writing that last paragraph in that article is utterly beyond me.

Boggling idiocy of the first order.

What is it with the n00b influx in this thread? o.0Firstly, the jokes on you, you misunderstood his last paragraph. Secondly, here's a hard-and-fast rule, it you've made roughly 10 posts, then don't insult editors, who have much more experience than you.

Mobigame provided us a copy of an email, dated May 1, 2009, from Edge Games to David Papazian, in which Edge Games indicates that removing the UK and US application and changing the name of the game wouldn't stop Mobigame from being sued unless Mobigames also agreed to a monetary settlement. This aggressively-worded email is not reflected in the Edge Games Public Statement, nor was it mentioned in our extensive email conversations with Dr. Langdell.

Tim Langdell in 'hiding the facts to make his position look better' shocker!

According to these records, David Papazian did not telephone Edge Games on May 14th between 3:14PM and 4:28PM, as Edge has alleged. The Edge Games Public Statement is thus in contradiction to Mobigame's France Telecom records, and again, Edge has declined to comment on the matter.

Tim Langdell in 'flat-out lying to make his position look better' shocker!

Seriously guys, good work on taking this long to figure out what everyone else already knew, and for wording this article in such a way as to imply 'we weren't wrong, we were just misinformed'. That misinformation goes as far as two outright lies that would surely affect proceedings in a court of law. Like many others above, I'm slightly incredulous that you're still standing by your original stance.

Jesus holy Christ!

Just SHUT THE FUCK UP!...Why do you even take issue with this? How the hell does this concern you? This is just trolling! You may think "Oh but mummy, I have a right to my opinion" but you do not. This is not how the internet works. The internet is a place where everything is subjugated to the creators desire, and ordered into certain beliefs and opinions. Why would you all continue to troll this poor man like this? He is just trying to be objective here!

Everybody seems so mad about The Escapist being slghtly late with the news and taking a stance that they disagree with. This shit takes time, and just because you don'r agree with the article doesn't meant it's crap.

Goos job Russ, it's good to see that you all are working hard.

I think you misunderstand. I -never- have a problem with articles I merely disagree with. Articles that are misleading, dubious in their claims (see repeated "Langdell has a case" when that's severely in doubt right now) and either ill researched or willingly ignoring any evidence to support a bizarrely contrary opinion - then I have a problem y'know? Especially when it's over something as important as this case is. It might be a few hits to The Escapist, or a drama elsewhere for some of the readership but it -is- important because it might be you or someone else equally undeserving in this position next time Langdell or similar goes on a super happy trademark funtime assault.

Seriously, before you go claiming it's "just a disagreement" with The Escapist's stance - check the evidence, please. Read Shamus' links, read the TIGS thread, read Chaos Edge then tell me, hand on heart that The Escapist are absolutely, utterly and totally right to claim that Langdell has a case and that Mobigame are merely aggrieved and feeling picked on.

The man has produced nothing in 15 years. Almost everything he lays claim to is in doubt from the -actual- IP holders. You cannot possibly say with any conviction that he definitely has a case, yet The Escapist persist. Why? Hits? Stupidity? Naivety? I don't know, but it's ridiculous the conclusions drawn from the evidence.

This article is so far from "a good job" that it really beggars belief. The second consecutive article on the subject to ignore any evidence is not in any way, shape or form a good job. To have evidence presented to you pointing to the contrary then to effectively ignore the evidence in the final paragraph for no obvious reason is not a good job. It's disgraceful journalism.

Once again, your opinion is irrelevant here. Maybe one post, but two is far too many. Please, shut it. It is NOT disgraceful journalism. Not that you can talk, you have a grand total of five posts!

Guys, use this (wo)man as an example:

Armitage Shanks:I disagree with this article on a fundamental level. Why is The Escapist even trying to attempt objectivity? Don't they know the best journalists base stories on assumption and public opinion?

I actually agree with you, subjectivity is much more interesting. The thing is, in a court case like this, if you turn out wrong, you look like an idiot.

I think this article proves they aren't. What a load of absolute fucking horseshit.

Here's what they could have written: "We got it wrong - here's what we now know". Instead, this article hides behind "Ooh, lookie - new evidence!", using content DOZENS of other articles have already published (in many cases months ago), including the huge resource at TIGSource.

What's most depressing is the number of people here taking Escapist's crap at face value, rather than looking elsewhere online and finding genuine investigative journalism and commentary on the subject from the likes of TIGSource, Eurogamer, et al.

Also, gotta love your copyright attorney, Escapist. I'd say anyone telling a company to settle when the disputed mark is in part based on rights infringement and almost certainly partially falsified court documents is an idiot, not a professional.

But if that's so, then why is Mobigame fighting? The answer to that is that they believe they've been treated unfairly.

No, the answer is because they have a legal basis to dispute the mark that is just as strong and Langdell's case for the mark, but, despite all the evidence to show this, you guys are clearly too dumb to realise it or have egos too big to admit you fucked up in the first place. Either way, this would be piss-poor form from a petulant and arrogant teenage blogger. From a supposedly professional publication, it's absolutely shameful. Congratulations, Escapist - you want to be Edge, but you're actually The News of the World.

...Bwuh? This one is just uninformed! Their original standpoint was that Langdell's position was wrong, evil, poisonous and wrong.

...Why would you think that Mobigame has even the slightest chance in this situation? You can't fight a copyright.

Also, they are continuously implying that Langdell is evil and using corrupt techniques to get his way. Moreover, you insist in being extraordinarily insulting. See above for my opinion of your standpoint.

So why don't you just shut, up you little OK, something less insulting, it seems to annoy people and make them get all condesending on me. How about... kittens. Yeah. Shut up, you little kittens! ...Uhhh...

Firstly, the jokes on you, you misunderstood his last paragraph. Secondly, here's a hard-and-fast rule, it you've made roughly 10 posts, then don't insult editors, who have much more experience than you.

Firstly, no I didn't. I can read and comprehend words perfectly fine, thank you. Secondly, no there isn't because that would be a very silly rule indeed. Thirdly, I'm not insulting the editor, I'm questioning the quality of the work. There's a pretty major difference, man.

Please, shut it. It is NOT disgraceful journalism. Not that you can talk, you have a grand total of five posts!

And rather obviously, post count != authority on a subject. Just so you know. And if you could possibly explain what on Earth the postcount I have on here has to do with the quality of my journalism, I'd *really* love to know. Actually, no I wouldn't.

Why would you think that Mobigame has even the slightest chance in this situation?

Perhaps because they're quite possibly not a shell company with its headquarters at a mailbox who have single handedly failed to release anything other than 1 BREW port of a mobile phone game that they quite possibly don't even own the rights to in the past 15 years?

Quite possibly because given the evidence at hand it's abundantly clear that they not only "have a chance" but that Langdell likely hasn't got a leg to stand on despite the claims in this article. No amount of telling people to shut up is going to change the facts, dude.

Escapist, escapist. I don't know what to think. You´re such an excellent website, with a nice mix of entertainment, game related news and personal articles. And then you report on edge or edgy: the clash of two gamemakers.

You made a good point in not wanting to join the bandwagon and doing actual research, pouring over documents and consulting with both sides.

But if you have any sense, you would not take everything from both sides at face value. You know that langdell continually misinforms. Game-maker. CEO of Edge games. Do you know what ceo means? "The highest-ranking executive in a company or organization, responsible for carrying out the policies of the board of directors on a day-to-day basis." (-dictionary.com)

And if anything, Edge games can at best be called a game publisher. They haven't made games for almost two decades.

And apparently he frequently communicates in a way while disguising himself. Smoke and mirrors. His lack of comment, without an apparent good reason, says a lot.

In your very admirable drive to be correct, you keep giving too much leeway to someone who shows himself as a deceiver. I bet that he wouldn't have given himself away otherwise in those e-mails, which is impressive.

So I was disappointed by the failure to see through his smoke and mirrors and see what many of us had sensed even before your first article. I think your point would have been much stronger if you had stuck to the facts that supported your opinion and showed those to us, instead of mostly sharing your opinion based on those facts.

Armitage Shanks:I disagree with this article on a fundamental level. Why is The Escapist even trying to attempt objectivity? Don't they know the best journalists base stories on assumption and public opinion?

You seem to be giving props to The Escapist for trying to be objective, but that's exactly the problem. The articles demonstrate a baffling disregard for the history and context of the dispute, as anyone with fifteen minutes to spend could find out for themselves. As a result the conclusions drawn, for example that Mobigame is fighting because they think they've been treated unfairly, are so myopic and illogical they become laughable.

The Escapist should have stuck to PDFs. (just had to stick that in for Mr. Nerd Rage up there).

What's most depressing is the number of people here taking Escapist's crap at face value, rather than looking elsewhere online and finding genuine investigative journalism and commentary on the subject from the likes of TIGSource, Eurogamer, et al.

You bring this up time and time again, and I would like to politely inform you that I have in fact looked elsewhere online. I've read opinion pieces on The Australian Gamer website, opinion pieces here on the Escapist by Shamus Young, TIGSource and Eurogamer, Tim's own website, hell, even Wikipedia. Because I like to be informed before taking a side. I've read all those, and do you know what conclusion I've come to?

I don't know enough. I, as a bystander as it were, do not know everything. I am neither omnipotent, nor omnipresent. Maybe you are, maybe thats why its easier to throw your weight against him. But I seriously think there is no point in acting like this case is black and white. Even reading through all that mountain of sources, I'm reserving judgement. Because I like to be informed before taking a side. And currently, there just isn't enough conclusive information to prove that Langdell's case is illegitimate.

Sure, reading all that I will grant you that the man is a massive prick, he almost certainly has engaged in morally questionable business practices in the past, and his claim does indeed seem shady.

Yes, it would be fun to start continuously shouting about how he is singlehandedly ruining the gaming industry and throw him in the internet wicker man.

But, I think I'm gonna hold back my judgement for now. Sure, you may be indeed be right in what you say about Langdell, but stop acting like your opinion is the only correct one. Not making a decision for the meantime is just as valid.

Jeez, stop moaning! No one cares, and, clearly, most of us liked the article.

(Etc)

Are you... That was just some huge, amazing joke, right? I'm sorry if I've misunderstood you, but I don't know you very well, and you wrote so much, I began to to wonder if you were being serious. But there's no way you could say things like that and mean them, surely? It couldn't be anything other than a joke? Well done, that was really funny. Surprisingly dilligent, too. Most people would've just quoted a couple of posts and left it at that, but seven? I'm impressed.

Jeez, stop moaning! No one cares, and, clearly, most of us liked the article.

(Etc)

Are you... That was just some huge, amazing joke, right? I'm sorry if I've misunderstood you, but I don't know you very well, and you wrote so much, I began to to wonder if you were being serious. But there's no way you could say things like that and mean them, surely? It couldn't be anything other than a joke? Well done, that was really funny. Surprisingly dilligent, too. Most people would've just quoted a couple of posts and left it at that, but seven? I'm impressed.

Aha, now I see the irony...

Sorry, I started, but I just didn't stop, it sometimes happens. Also, when I started quoting I hadn't noticed the huge backlog of hate for this article.

Firstly, the jokes on you, you misunderstood his last paragraph. Secondly, here's a hard-and-fast rule, it you've made roughly 10 posts, then don't insult editors, who have much more experience than you.

Firstly, no I didn't. I can read and comprehend words perfectly fine, thank you. Secondly, no there isn't because that would be a very silly rule indeed. Thirdly, I'm not insulting the editor, I'm questioning the quality of the work. There's a pretty major difference, man.

Please, shut it. It is NOT disgraceful journalism. Not that you can talk, you have a grand total of five posts!

And rather obviously, post count != authority on a subject. Just so you know. And if you could possibly explain what on Earth the postcount I have on here has to do with the quality of my journalism, I'd *really* love to know. Actually, no I wouldn't.

Why would you think that Mobigame has even the slightest chance in this situation?

Perhaps because they're quite possibly not a shell company with its headquarters at a mailbox who have single handedly failed to release anything other than 1 BREW port of a mobile phone game that they quite possibly don't even own the rights to in the past 15 years?

Quite possibly because given the evidence at hand it's abundantly clear that they not only "have a chance" but that Langdell likely hasn't got a leg to stand on despite the claims in this article. No amount of telling people to shut up is going to change the facts, dude.

You can't fight a copyright.

Lucky it's a trademark dispute then, isn't it?

Eh, yeah, that was a weird rant I just wrote, I just kinda started and didn't stop... anywayz, might as well go through with this...

I believe that post count does matter (if only on a bureaucratic level) because the internet is entirely subjective to the creators intent (and, come on, when you're in a fight, you don't decide what kinda arguments to use, do you?)

I'm annoyed at you questioning the quality of the editors work because you did it more than once. Twice you insulted his work and I felt that it was unnecessary, mainly because he wasn't even siding with the obviously-evil-bad-guy, but because he was trying to be objective about it.

As for misunderstanding his paragraph, from what you said it read a lot like you didn't understand it. Buuuuuuuuuuuuuuut, you may have... (yes, I am backing down. Mainly because I don't want a war to start. Wars are scary, and keep me away from my beloved Morpheus.)

And finally, you say that Mobigame will win because their content has quality. I'm saying, even though Edge games have NO content and are evil bureaucrats, they will win. They have a stronger legal case (so far... we have yet to see if any of their dirtiest dirt is to be unveiled) regardless of who is stronger morally.

We will see.

As for me saying Copyright, and you saying trademark, that is just my mistake, deepest apologies. Although, I wasn't aware there was a difference.

Armitage Shanks:I disagree with this article on a fundamental level. Why is The Escapist even trying to attempt objectivity? Don't they know the best journalists base stories on assumption and public opinion?

You seem to be giving props to The Escapist for trying to be objective, but that's exactly the problem. The articles demonstrate a baffling disregard for the history and context of the dispute, as anyone with fifteen minutes to spend could find out for themselves. As a result the conclusions drawn, for example that Mobigame is fighting because they think they've been treated unfairly, are so myopic and illogical they become laughable.

The Escapist should have stuck to PDFs. (just had to stick that in for Mr. Nerd Rage up there).

Also... what is it with all the new people joining for just this one article? It better not be just one person, that would destroy my soul.

The problem I believe was The Escapists wording in the previous article, where it stressed the sheer amount of time and manpower used to collect facts, in its attempt to be the drop of reason in a sea of chaos.It sort of came out that WE have checked the facts, and YOU are all wrong.

FROGGEman2 - I'll assume you are not flamebaiting nor trolling in you defence - You shouldnt go about using CS 'leet' speech in a rationale argument, nor consider post count to be any factor to a argument. You need to explain your rationale in a calm and precise manner to show that you are reasonable and have a valid point. Swearing and using leet speech basically sends out the message that you are just lashing out at anyone that doesnt agree with you, and that its pointless to debate with you as a result.

ASnogarD:The problem I believe was The Escapists wording in the previous article, where it stressed the sheer amount of time and manpower used to collect facts, in its attempt to be the drop of reason in a sea of chaos.It sort of came out that WE have checked the facts, and YOU are all wrong.

FROGGEman2 - I'll assume you are not flamebaiting nor trolling in you defence - You shouldnt go about using CS 'leet' speech in a rationale argument, nor consider post count to be any factor to a argument. You need to explain your rationale in a calm and precise manner to show that you are reasonable and have a valid point. Swearing and using leet speech basically sends out the message that you are just lashing out at anyone that doesnt agree with you, and that its pointless to debate with you as a result.

I know all these things, during the rant I was being sarcastic...

...Anyway, I didn't come across as that angry, did I? Maybe getting progressively annoyed?

But... I would rather if you didn't try to school me. You making me out to be some 12-year-old kid. And it's very condescending.

And no, I'm not flamebaiting. Nooooooo. Read that mods? NOT FLAMEBAITING.

I believe that post count does matter (if only on a bureaucratic level) because the internet is entirely subjective to the creators intent (and, come on, when you're in a fight, you don't decide what kinda arguments to use, do you?)

I have no idea what that even means, man. If you're really concerned about the weight of my opinion then feel free to google me rather than look at my post count and you're welcome to judge me further from there. You can find my writing and my games pretty easily. I don't expect you to like either, but y'know, it's a bit more informative than just glancing at a post count to see if I'm a chancer or not.

I'm annoyed at you questioning the quality of the editors work because you did it more than once. Twice you insulted his work and I felt that it was unnecessary, mainly because he wasn't even siding with the obviously-evil-bad-guy, but because he was trying to be objective about it.

What possible reason have you got to be annoyed at me for questioning the article? Are you his mum? Come on, man, I'm sure The Escapist staff are perfectly capable of defending themselves without your assistance but y'know, what's the point of a forum feedback thread if not to get feedback good or bad?

And finally, you say that Mobigame will win because their content has quality. I'm saying, even though Edge games have NO content and are evil bureaucrats, they will win. They have a stronger legal case (so far... we have yet to see if any of their dirtiest dirt is to be unveiled) regardless of who is stronger morally.

No, I'm saying that the statement regarding Langdell definitely having a case is incorrect because in order to have a valid case the trademark would need to be active. For 15 years it hasn't been. That does not, under any circumstances give someone a "stronger legal case" than someone who will actively be using the trademark.

It's the very crux of why I'm calling The Escapist article out. It's got nothing to do with who has the biggest law-penis or who can shuffle papers the loudest but everything to do with who has the weight of the law and officialdom behind them. Clue: It's looking HIGHLY likely that's not Langdell. So when an article says he has a case, well, I'm sure I don't need to say that -yet- again.

As for me saying Copyright, and you saying trademark, that is just my mistake, deepest apologies. Although, I wasn't aware there was a difference.

Yeah, there is. And it's a massive difference at that.

Also... what is it with all the new people joining for just this one article? It better not be just one person, that would destroy my soul.

Well, I'm definitely not Craig nor am I Synnah nor is Synnah Craig or Craig me. But to answer your question: because the article is *that* bad that anyone who has been following the story from even the furthest of sidelines can see how filled with crazy talk it is. Especially that last paragraph.

As an overall disclaimer to drape over my post, I was just generally annoyed that this article got so much rage for no clear reason.

Perhaps if you read the posts and not the post counts you'd see there is a very clear reason? Just an idea. Take it or leave it.

The escapist very slowly edging their way (ha!) to what should have been their initial conclusion. What puzzles me is for Langdells TM claims to hold any sway Edge Games needs to be a meaningful functioning company that produces, you know, games. That's transparently not the case, for all the weeks of 'pouring over documents' did the Escapist, a games site, not think to examine the veracity of Edge Games claimed output?

I gotta admit, when I read the article from a couple weeks ago, I thought you'd jumped the gun in demonizing Edge Games and Tim Langdell, but reading those links really puts him back under that light. I will say though, I don't really speak legal, so what is it that we're looking for in that third link?

The takeaway is that his trademark case is not NEARLY as strong as he makes it out to be. TL has been smacked down in court in cases not all that different from the Mobigames one. It's very likely another court would come to very similar conclusions with regard to Mobigames, as long as they have the time and money to fight him.

Of course, the language barriers and international borders make this more complicated, but I think the case is solid on the merits: There is NO WAY anyone would confuse Mobigames product with Tim Langdell's company, which is what you would need to prove to win a trademark case.

Well that was eye opening. Does this guy do anything for a living except sponge off other developers?

Have I misread the judgement on edge vs souledge? It found no case to answer for Namco, so why did they switch to Soulcalibur?

I've wondered the same thing. They spanked him in court and then... changed the name anyway?

I don't understand it at all, and like all things that surround Edge, the more you know the more confusing it gets.

EDIT: Above, someone cleared this up. They won the case, but only AFTER they had changed the name. They didn't want the game to sit in limbo for years while the case went through the courts. That makes sense.

It's really important to note that all of my reading has been from second-and-third hand stories and re-posts of the links I cited above. The Escapist staff is the first team of journalists I know of to do original research. (I certainly didn't.)

If they sound like they're "waffling" it's probably because they're coming at it fresh instead of leaning on blog postings. There's a lot of value in that, and a lot of value in taking a more clinical approach. In fact, this is how journalism is supposed to work. I'd love to see Langdell tarred and feathered as much as anyone, and I'm confident if they dig long enough they'll discover TL is a liar and a fraud. The advantage will be that they will have come to that conclusion on their own instead of feeding from the internet rumor mill. Do not underestimate the value of this, particularly in the future.

Disclaimer: I am a columnist here, but I have no inside knowledge whatsoever and have not discussed this story with anyone at Themis since they began this series. The above is merely my opinion.

@FROGGEman2: Thanks for your informed and intelligent reply that completely ignores many of the facts, just like the article, in fact.

@Bobbyskizza: Most sites wouldn't bother to report this? Really? At least 20 major sites ran this story before this one.

@Armitage Shanks: I don't think the case is black and white, but the more I learn (and I've seen all the stuff The Escapist has), the more it becomes clear what might have once been a reasonably safe case for Langdell is in fact, anything but. I'm not saying Mobigames will walk a court case, but they have a hell of a good position. The problem I have is with this site's coverage, which went so far as major misrepresentation in its first article (including publishing many things that were just flat out inaccurate), so much so that Mobigames could have sued.

Anyway, fuck it. This site's editors don't think they've done anything wrong and there's not much point in trying to argue the toss with sycophants.

Oh, and this - "The Escapist staff is the first team of journalists I know of to do original research. (I certainly didn't.)" - is absolute bollocks if you're insinuating this is the first site to not base its articles on other stuff online. Eurogamer's piece involved plenty of original research. TIGSource's stuff involves more investigative research than any other coverage.

Many people perceived the first article (at best) as a failed attempt at objectivism/devil's advocatry. Mistakes happen. Still feels like you're trying to defend the previous article. It's nice and all, but if you do think a mistake was made (might not be the case, just assuming), you could just admit it and move on. And maybe next time just present the facts you've got and refrain from presenting such conclusions. I know you meant (and mean) well, but they really sound like they're carrying an unintended message, if that makes any sense.

Thanks for trying, keep up the work. Lots of people still expect it to become good.

HobbesMkii:Well, I'm thoroughly confused. I was pretty confident The Escapist was going with their seemingly regular move to side with the larger (or possibly more industry-connected) group (I'll bet they get some pretty sweet access to new games from it).

Err. Did I fail an irony check ? The Escapist has nothing to gain from "siding with Langdell". And if ONE thing is clear in this mess, it's that Edge Games isn't producing any sweet new games... or any games at all.

And don't call people "n***s". (just to make it clear, no, I'm not asking politely) Being annoyed at the angry comments doesn't justify your discrediting yourself and disgracing the comments page with that... "insult", for lack of a better term. If you're trying to defend the escapist, for form's sake, at least don't make its forums look like your local BattleRetards server in the process.

And really, the only thing a high post count on here tells me is that the author is unable or unwilling to seek out a better level of discussion elsewhere. It's like flaunting a high post count on GameFAQs or something.

chongololo:The escapist very slowly edging their way (ha!) to what should have been their initial conclusion. What puzzles me is for Langdells TM claims to hold any sway Edge Games needs to be a meaningful functioning company that produces, you know, games. That's transparently not the case, for all the weeks of 'pouring over documents' did the Escapist, a games site, not think to examine the veracity of Edge Games claimed output?

Edge games ported their games to new platforms and sell them there. It may not sell much, but it counts as producing a product, as highlighted in the initial article.

And really, the only thing a high post count on here tells me is that the author is unable or unwilling to seek out a better level of discussion elsewhere. It's like flaunting a high post count on GameFAQs or something.

Thanks for that pleasant insult. I would rather you didn't take one member and use them as a representative of the whole forum.

CraigGrannell:Oh, and this - "The Escapist staff is the first team of journalists I know of to do original research. (I certainly didn't.)" - is absolute bollocks if you're insinuating this is the first site to not base its articles on other stuff online. Eurogamer's piece involved plenty of original research. TIGSource's stuff involves more investigative research than any other coverage.

Surely there is a difference between investigative research and actually communicating with the parties? Besides which who is to say what is right on the matter, at present nobody has the full facts. At the end of the day it appears the vast majority of what is said is opinion.

Whilst it would appear, at least from my perspective, that Mobigames have the edge in this case if only because EDGE haven't released a game for an extremely long period of time and therefore are not using their trademark (or something along those lines, to be honest I haven't read up on the case in a while). Having said that, he poster above is claiming otherwise, as is the article so I'm not sure what to believe.

At the end of the day all journalism is going to be sensationalized to a degree. I am sure many sites may wish to paint Langdell to have no case at all, and will therefore display only evidence against him, likewise some articles - like this one - may argue otherwise.

As for this article however, I think I have to agree with georgek when they stated:

I believe they are correct in the sense that the article doesn't address Langell's past records or his apparent history of unsavoury business tactics. Everything else has been stated before so I'm not going to bother addressing them.

Anyone else tempted to release a series of flash games called Edge something?I say anyone with any flash or java ability should make a little game, spam the internet with them and leave contact details - see what TL has to say about that. If I could shoot one person in this entire world it would be this man. In my opinion he is the lowest form of life - the epitome of Andrew Ryan's 'Parasites'.

For those saying the escapist is siding with the bigger company, get a clue. There's no evidence that Edge Games consists of anyone BUT Tim Langdell - Mobigames on the other hand will be coming off this lawsuit as the indie heroes of the games industry and I applaud them for it.

ben---neb:Sigh. Just shows what happens when you let the government intervene in markets. Without state inducted "trademarks" then Mobigame could publish their work and Edge games could actually try and do somethig productive.

Best be trolling. Trademarks are not a "state inducted" anything. They are a judicial measure which are demanded by businesses. They serve two extremely useful functions; protecting a businesses identity and reputation, and allowing customers to make informed choices on purchasing (see: the economic/game theory concept of "peaches and lemons"). Unlike other forms of IP, they have no chilling effect; you can evade a trademark simply by naming your brand/product something else (and, if you're smart, not telling the competition in advance so they trademark that as well).In short, not only are they demanded by the participants of a free market, but they are essential to its function as they allow some relation to exist between demand and pricing. Also, unlike other forms of intellectual property, their "use it or lose it" nature means that they cannot usually be "sat on" by IP trolls. This case is a relatively rare and unfortunate exception.In conclusion: Go Mobigames! Make that system work!

I never thought I'd say this but (drumroll please) you're...you're...right. You've convinced me. I'll concentrate my scorn against patents and the like instead of trademarks.

A historic occassion if ever there was, someone winning a forum argument.

HobbesMkii:Well, I'm thoroughly confused. I was pretty confident The Escapist was going with their seemingly regular move to side with the larger (or possibly more industry-connected) group (I'll bet they get some pretty sweet access to new games from it).

Err. Did I fail an irony check ? The Escapist has nothing to gain from "siding with Langdell". And if ONE thing is clear in this mess, it's that Edge Games isn't producing any sweet new games... or any games at all.

Unless, of course, The Escapist views siding with a member of the International Game Developers Association's Board of Directors as potentially beneficial. Shows they've got the IGDA's back. Sure, it doesn't score them shit from Edge, because Edge makes nothing. But the IGDA distanced themselves from the call for Langdell's removal (implying a somewhat support of their Board Member, if not outright). You're viewing gains as purely being Single Party to Single Party. You're completely ignoring the fact that they can generate goodwill industry wide by being industry shills.

Seeing as I'm actually in the process of compiling the legal documents related to Langdell's trademark actions, in addition to reading Mobigame and Langdell's accounts, I can safely say that this article is a load of horse-shit. Langdell repeatedly misrepresents his trademarks, not only to third parties but to the trademark board, and only escaped sanctions in the federal case brought by Velocity Micro because he made an out-of-court settlement with that company to have the matter dropped.

Capo Taco:Edge games ported their games to new platforms and sell them there. It may not sell much, but it counts as producing a product, as highlighted in the initial article.

The Edge Games site has a list for a tiny handful of mobile games, none of which are available nor have they been available for some years now. The only concrete evidence of any actual game was a port of Bobby Bearing to a few Nokia phones nearly a decade ago and even then it's not clear who actually released the game (or for that matter owns the rights to the game). There would appear to be no Edge Games currently available to purchase. So no, they don't sell much, 'they' don't sell anything.

Also, re: 'Edge Games ported their games' - it would appear as if there is only one employee of Edge Games. Their 'CEO'. Tim Langdell.

HobbesMkii:Well, I'm thoroughly confused. I was pretty confident The Escapist was going with their seemingly regular move to side with the larger (or possibly more industry-connected) group (I'll bet they get some pretty sweet access to new games from it).

Err. Did I fail an irony check ? The Escapist has nothing to gain from "siding with Langdell". And if ONE thing is clear in this mess, it's that Edge Games isn't producing any sweet new games... or any games at all.

Unless, of course, The Escapist views siding with a member of the International Game Developers Association's Board of Directors as potentially beneficial. Shows they've got the IGDA's back. Sure, it doesn't score them shit from Edge, because Edge makes nothing. But the IGDA distanced themselves from the call for Langdell's removal (implying a somewhat support of their Board Member, if not outright). You're viewing gains as purely being Single Party to Single Party. You're completely ignoring the fact that they can generate goodwill industry wide by being industry shills.

The IGDA did call a board meeting on TL's removal, unless I missed something. (didn't go real smooth though, seems the IGDA elected members were both confused and unwilling)